Who is my neighbor?

Boston helpers remind us of the importance of Good Samaritans, protective laws

April 20, 2013

Last week's bombing near the finish line of the Boston Marathon created an immediately chaotic and terrifying scene. The two pressure-cooker bombs exploded on the sidewalks where tightly-gathered onlookers waited for loved ones to complete the race. Three people were killed and many more suffered gruesome injuries.

Barricades intended to separate and protect the runners from swelling crowds made it challenging for first responders to reach the victims. With many running from danger amidst smoke and noise, it was easy for downed victims to become lost in the pandemonium.

But then came the Good Samaritans.

Bystanders, who escaped the blasts' effects, rushed to offer care and comfort. Restaurant workers streamed out to offer assistance and towels. Even former New England Patriots offensive lineman Joe Andruzzi, whose cancer foundation was having a fundraiser on Boylston Street, helped carry victims to safety.

In today's overly litigious society, offering emergency care might seem like a risky venture. What if the homemade tourniquet fails to stop the bleeding? What if the patient is jostled in a way that causes further injury? Will I be sued?

Monday's helpers weren't thinking about legal liability; they were focused on one thing: aiding those in need until they could be delivered into the hands of medical providers. They weren't repulsed by blood or blackened limbs. They offered a hand, a t-shirt, a sip of water.

Fortunately, all U.S. states have some form of "Good Samaritan" law — the name derives from the Biblical parable about the man who helped a dying stranger after two others passed by — which shields rescuers from civil liability for unintentional harm. The policy behind these laws is to make sure people aren't discouraged from offering assistance for fear of making a treatment error.

Virginia has a Good Samaritan statute much like the Massachusetts law that shielded last week's street-side heroes: Any person who in good faith renders emergency aid without compensation is not liable for civil damages for acts or omissions resulting from the care.

Not only is it important to preserve these statutes to encourage citizens to help each other in emergencies, we ought to consider taking it a step further.

The Good Samaritan rule may protect rescuers, but under the "American bystander rule," there is no common-law duty to rescue strangers in the first place. Perhaps rooted in our fierce sense of independence, the legal principle reflects that people have the right to go about their business without "meddling" (the rescuer) or being "meddled with" (the victim).

Yet in our increasingly disconnected society, where neighborhoods aren't as clearly defined, strangers pass each other on the block and people spend so much time indoors or in cars, it has become easy to become self-focused and even callous. Furthermore, with gun violence on the rise, keeping one's head down and "avoiding trouble" may seem like a form of self-preservation.

A few states have tried to be more proactive with the duty to offer help. Minnesota and Vermont require a person at the scene of an emergency to provide reasonable assistance, which could be as simple as calling 911. While we'd hope people would take such steps without a law, if adopting a more affirmative duty would save a few more lives, then perhaps Virginia should consider it.

The Boston tragedy reminded us how life can change in an instant, even in the most unexpected places. It also reminds that we might want to reconsider our definition of "stranger." The anonymous bystander next to us in the crowd just might be our own Samaritan.